Low incidence of hepatitis B virus reactivation and subsequent hepatitis in patients with chronic hepatitis C receiving direct‐acting antiviral therapy

To determine the clinical characteristics of hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation in patients undergoing interferon‐free antihepatitis C virus (HCV) therapy, we examined HBV DNA in 25 HBV co‐infected patients and 765 patients with resolved HBV infection during and after treatment with direct‐acting antiviral agents (DAAs). Among those with HCV genotype 1, asunaprevir plus daclatasvir was administered to 160 patients, sofosbuvir (SOF) plus ledipasvir to 438 patients and paritaprevir plus ombitasvir and ritonavir to 25 patients. In total, 167 patients with genotype 2 were treated with SOF plus ribavirin. Three patients with an HBV DNA level ≥2000 IU/mL were treated with entecavir before anti‐HCV therapy, without reactivation of HBV. In 3 of 22 (12%) HBV surface antigen (HBsAg)‐positive patients with an HBV DNA level <2000 IU/mL, the viral load increased during treatment. However, hepatitis flare did not occur in these patients. There was no significant difference in clinical history between patients with and without HBV reactivation. Among 765 patients with resolved HBV infection, HBV reactivation occurred in 1 (0.1%) patient after initial resolution, whose HBV DNA level spontaneously decreased after DAA therapy. We compared anti‐HBs titres at baseline with those at post‐DAA therapy in 123 patients without HBsAg. There was no significant difference in anti‐HBs levels between the two points (P = .79). In conclusion, HBV reactivation was rare in HBsAg‐negative patients treated with DAA therapy. Additionally, hepatitis did not occur in HBV‐reactivated patients with a baseline HBV DNA level <2000 IU/mL before DAA therapy.     

Reactivation of hepatitis B virus during interferon‐free therapy with daclatasvir and asunaprevir in patient with hepatitis B virus/hepatitis C virus co‐infection

Direct‐acting antiviral agents (DAA) for hepatitis C virus (HCV) are not effective for hepatitis B virus (HBV), which may be suggestive of reactivation of anti‐HBe hepatitis during interferon (IFN)‐free DAA therapy in HBV/HCV co‐infected patients with inactive HBV. A 69‐year‐old male patient was diagnosed with chronic hepatitis due to HBV/HCV co‐infection with serum levels of alanine aminotransferase (ALT) of 94 U/L, HCV RNA of 4.2 log IU/mL and HBV DNA of 2.5 log copies/mL. HCV was thought to be responsible for the hepatitis activity because of low level of HBV core‐related antigen (3.1 log U/mL). He was treated with combination therapy of daclatasvir and asunaprevir. Serum ALT gradually increased, and reached 237 U/L on day 43 in spite of undetectable HCV RNA. Serum HBV DNA was increasing to 7.0 log copies/mL at that time. The treatment was stopped due to suspicion of drug‐induced liver injury and/or HBV reactivation. Administration of entecavir reduced HBV DNA levels, followed by improvement in ALT levels. This report proposes that close monitoring of HBV DNA during the anti‐HCV DAA therapy and the commencement of anti‐HBV therapy with nucleoside analogs after the increase of HBV DNA should be considered in patients with HBV/HCV co‐infection.     

Spontaneous remission of hepatitis B virus reactivation during direct‐acting antiviral agent‐based therapy for chronic hepatitis C

The administration of direct‐acting antiviral agents (DAAs) to treat hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection has been reported to cause hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation. However, the actual conditions of HBV reactivation and the ideal timing of medical intervention have not been fully evaluated. We report the cases of two female patients dually infected with HBV and HCV. Both patients were inactive HBV carriers. Although the serum HCV RNA levels promptly decreased after the initiation of DAA‐based therapy, the serum HBV DNA levels gradually increased during DAA‐based therapy, with the peak serum HBV DNA levels observed at 16 weeks after the initiation of DAA‐based therapy in both cases. Subsequently, we checked the serum HBV DNA levels closely every week several times. Fortunately, the serum HBV DNA levels gradually decreased without medical intervention. Neither case developed an alanine aminotransferase flare‐up. The HCV genotypes were 2a and 1b, and the DAA‐based therapies of Cases 1 and 2 were 12 weeks of sofosbuvir/ribavirin and ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir, respectively. The significance of our case reports is the demonstration of the existence of spontaneous remission of HBV reactivation that developed during DAA‐based therapy, the avoidance of intervention of nucleot(s)ide analogs by frequent monitoring of serum HBV DNA levels, and development of HBV reactivation regardless of the viral genotype or class of DAA. In conclusion, the close monitoring of serum HBV DNA levels during and after DAA‐based therapy is essential and medical intervention for HBV reactivation should be carefully considered on an individual basis.     

Hepatitis B virus reactivation associated with anti‐neoplastic therapy

Reactivation of hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is a known complication during and after anti‐cancer therapy. This condition can affect two patient populations: it is most commonly seen in patients who are seropositive for hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), but it is also being increasingly reported among patients who are HBsAg‐negative but who have prior infection, as evident by seropositive status for antibody to hepatitis B core antigen (anti‐HBc), irrespective of their anti‐HBs (antibody to HBsAg) status. The clinical course can vary from asymptomatic hepatitis to fulminant hepatic failure that can be potentially fatal. With the increasing use of biological agents in addition to potent cytotoxic chemotherapy in the armamentarium of anti‐cancer treatments, reactivation of hepatitis B has become a common clinical situation that is faced by both oncologists and hepatologists especially in HBV endemic areas. In this review, we discuss the clinical course of reactivation in the two HBV‐infected sub‐populations, and the role of anti‐virals in the prevention and management of HBV reactivation in association with cytotoxic chemotherapy and biological therapies.     

Direct‐acting antivirals and hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation in co‐infected HBV/HCV kidney‐transplant recipients

Direct‐acting agents (DAAs) are highly efficient at treating hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections after kidney transplantation. Although drug agencies have recently warned of the risk of hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation after patients have received DAAs, reports have discrepant results in HBsAg‐positive and HBsAg‐negative patients. We report on 3 cases of HBV reactivation that were detected after achieving a DAA‐associated sustained virological response in 3 kidney‐transplant recipients initially HBsAg‐negative. In the first case, retrospective virological analysis revealed that HBsAgs had become positive and HBV DNA was detectable before initiating DAA therapy. In the second and third cases, HBV reactivation occurred 2 months and more than 1 year after stopping anti‐HCV therapy. These cases underline the discrepancies and highlight the need for comprehensive information before making definitive conclusions regarding the causal link between DAAs and HBV reactivation.     

De novo hepatitis B virus infection in hepatocellular carcinoma following eradication of hepatitis C virus by interferon therapy

Epidemiological studies have revealed that hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is still observed in hepatitis C virus (HCV)‐positive patients with a sustained response to interferon (IFN) treatment, although a substantial decrease in the incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has been achieved in those patients. Why HCC develops in patients who have a complete clearance of HCV remains unclear. Here, we provided evidence of latent hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection in an initially HCV‐positive chronic hepatitis patient who developed HCC after the complete eradication of HCV by IFN therapy. Although he was initially negative for anti‐hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) or circulating HBV DNA but positive for anti‐hepatitis B core antigen (anti‐HBc) in his sera, he developed HBsAg and HBV DNA during the course of the management of a series of cancers. HBV DNA was detectable in the liver tissues before HBV reactivation and the viral sequences derived from his anti‐HBc‐positive liver showed 100% homology to that from the serum after HBsAg appearance. These findings indicates that HCV‐positive individuals who are positive for anti‐HBc in the absence of HBsAg could have latent HBV infection in their liver tissues and intrahepatic HBV infection may play a pivotal role in the development of HCC after the IFN‐mediated eradication of HCV.     

Low risk of hepatitis B reactivation in patients with severe COVID‐19 who receive immunosuppressive therapy

A significant proportion of patients infected with SARS‐CoV‐2 develop severe respiratory symptoms due to an excessive immune response. Treatment of this condition may include immunosuppressive therapies, such as IL‐6 receptor antagonists and corticosteroids, which pose a risk for patients with active or past hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection. In this prospective cohort study, we analysed the risk of HBV reactivation in patients with severe COVID‐19 and resolved HBV infection undergoing immunosuppressive therapy. From 15th March to 30th April 2020, 600 patients with severe COVID‐19 were admitted to our hospital and treated with immune modulators. Data regarding HBV infection were available in 484, of whom 69 (14%) were HBsAg negative/anti‐HBc positive. For these patients, HBV reactivation prophylaxis with entecavir was strongly recommended. Complete follow‐up was available in 61 patients: 72% were male, median age was 67 years, and anti‐HBs was >10 IU/mL in 72%. The immunosuppressive drug most used was tocilizumab (72%). Despite HBV prophylaxis recommendation, 38 (62%) patients received entecavir and 23 (38%) did not. Baseline features of both groups were similar. At follow‐up, we found no cases of HBsAg seroreversion and only 2 (3%) patients (no prophylaxis group) had detectable serum HBV‐DNA (<15 IU/mL). Both were anti‐HBs negative and had normal aminotransferase levels. Our data show that the risk of HBV reactivation in patients with severe COVID‐19 and resolved HBV infection undergoing immunosuppressive treatment is low. However, if a systematic follow‐up after hospital discharge is unfeasible in patients without anti‐HBs, a short course of antiviral prophylaxis may be a safe option.     

Reactivation of hepatitis viruses following immunomodulating systemic chemotherapy

Reactivation of hepatitis B virus (HBV) or hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection following anticancer chemotherapy and immunosuppressive therapy is a well‐known complication. HBV reactivation has been reported to be associated with anti‐CD20 monoclonal antibody rituximab‐containing chemotherapy and tumor necrosis factor‐α inhibitor‐containing immunosuppressive therapy in HBV resolved patients (hepatitis B surface antigen negative and antibodies against hepatitis B core antigen positive and/or antibodies against surface antigen positive). On the other hand, HCV reactivation has been reported to be associated with liver damage or hepatic dysfunction, but fulminant hepatitis due to HCV reactivation is a rare complication. In this review, we describe the pathophysiology of the reactivation of HBV and HCV infection, as well as the clinical evidence and management of HCV reactivation.     

Clinical and virological factors associated with hepatitis B virus reactivation in HBsAg‐negative and anti‐HBc antibodies‐positive patients undergoing chemotherapy and/or autologous stem cell transplantation for cancer

Summary. We studied clinical outcome and clinico‐virological factors associated with hepatitis B virus reactivation (HBV‐R) following cancer treatment in hepatitis B virus surface antigen (HBsAg)‐negative/anti‐hepatitis B core antibodies (anti‐HBcAb)‐positive patients. Between 11/2003 and 12/2005, HBV‐R occurred in 7/84 HBsAg‐negative/anti‐HBcAb‐positive patients treated for haematological or solid cancer. Virological factors including HBV genotype, core promoter, precore, and HBsAg genotypic and amino acid (aa) patterns were studied. Patients presenting with reactivation were men, had an hepatitis B virus surface antibody (HBsAb) titre <100 IU/L and underwent >1 line of chemotherapy (CT) significantly more frequently than controls. All were treated for haematological cancer, 3/7 received haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT), and 4/7 received rituximab. Using multivariate analysis, receiving >1 line of CT was an independent risk factor for HBV‐R. Fatal outcome occurred in 3/7 patients (despite lamivudine therapy in two), whereas 2/4 survivors had an HBsAg seroconversion. HBV‐R involved non‐A HBV genotypes and core promoter and/or precore HBV mutants in all cases. Mutations known to impair HBsAg antigenicity were detected in HBV DNA from all seven patients. HBV DNA could be retrospectively detected in two patients prior cancer treatment and despite HBsAg negativity. HBV‐R is a concern in HBsAg‐negative/anti‐HBcAb‐positive patients undergoing cancer therapy, especially in males presenting with haematological cancer, a low anti‐HBsAb titre and more than one chemotherapeutic agent. HBV DNA testing is mandatory to improve diagnosis and management of HBV‐R in these patients. The role of specific therapies such as rituximab or HSCT as well as of HBV aa variability deserves further studies.     

Hepatitis B reactivation in patients receiving direct-acting antiviral therapy or interferon-based therapy for hepatitis C:A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM To assess the incidence of hepatitis B virus(HBV) reactivation in patients receiving direct-acting antiviral agent(DAA)-based therapy or interferon(IFN)-based therapy for hepatitis C and the effectiveness of preemptive antiHBV therapy for preventing HBV reactivation.METHODS The Pub Med, MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched, and 39 studies that reported HBV reactivation in HBV/hepatitis C virus coinfected patients receiving DAAbased therapy or IFN-based therapy were included. The primary outcome was the rate of HBV reactivation. The secondary outcomes included HBV reactivation-related hepatitis and the effectiveness of preemptive anti-HBV treatment with nucleos(t)ide analogues. The pooled effects were assessed using a random effects model. RESULTS The rate of HBV reactivation was 21.1% in hepatitis Bsurface antigen(HBs Ag)-positive patients receiving DAAbased therapy and 11.9% in those receiving IFN-based therapy. The incidence of hepatitis was lower in HBs Agpositive patients with undetectable HBV DNA compared to patients with detectable HBV DNA receiving DAA therapy(RR = 0.20, 95%CI: 0.06-0.64, P = 0.007). The pooled HBV reactivation rate in patients with previous HBV infection was 0.6% for those receiving DAA-based therapy and 0 for those receiving IFN-based therapy, and none of the patients experienced a hepatitis flare related to HBV reactivation. Preemptive anti-HBV treatment significantly reduced the potential risk of HBV reactivation in HBs Agpositive patients undergoing DAA-based therapy(RR = 0.31, 95%CI: 0.1-0.96, P = 0.042).CONCLUSION The rate of HBV reactivation and hepatitis flare occurrence is higher in HBs Ag-positive patients receiving DAA-based therapy than in those receiving IFN-based therapy, but these events occur less frequently in patients with previous HBV infection. Preemptive anti-HBV treatment is effective in preventing HBV reactivation.     

Factors associated with isolated anti‐hepatitis B core antibody in HIV‐positive patients: impact of compromised immunity

Summary. In regions that are hyperendemic for chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection, prevalence of and risk factors associated with isolated anti‐hepatitis B core antibody (anti‐HBc) in HIV‐positive patients are less well described. HIV‐positive patients who were tested for hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), anti‐hepatitis B surface antibody (anti‐HBs) and anti‐HBc at designated hospitals for HIV care in Taiwan were included for analysis. HBV DNA was detected by real‐time polymerase chain reaction in patients with and without isolated anti‐HBc. Of 2351 HIV‐positive patients, 450 (19.1%) were HBsAg positive, 411 (17.5%) were anti‐HBc positive alone and 963 (41.0%) for both anti‐HBs and anti‐HBc. Compared with patients who were positive for both anti‐HBs and anti‐HBc, patients with isolated anti‐HBc were older, less likely to have anti‐hepatitis C virus antibody (anti‐HCV), had lower CD4 lymphocyte counts and higher plasma HIV RNA loads. Older age (adjusted odds ratio, 1.029; 95% confidence interval, 1.015–1.043) and CD4 <100 cells/μL (adjusted odds ratio, 1.524; 95% confidence interval, 1.025–2.265) were independently associated with isolated anti‐HBc by logistic regression, while presence of anti‐HCV and injecting drug use were not. HBV DNA was detectable in 8.3% of 277 patients with isolated anti‐HBc and 14.3% of 56 patients with both anti‐HBs and anti‐HBc (P = 0.160). In a country hyperendemic for HBV infection, HIV‐positive patients at older age and with CD4 <100 cells/μL were more likely to have isolated anti‐HBc, suggesting that compromised immunity plays a role in the presence of this marker.     

Reactivation of hepatitis B virus in a patient with adult T‐cell leukemia–lymphoma receiving the anti‐CC chemokine receptor 4 antibody mogamulizumab

The introduction of molecularly targeted drugs has increased the risk of reactivation of hepatitis B virus (HBV), which is a potentially fatal complication following anticancer chemotherapy even in patients who have previously resolved their HBV infection. CC chemokine receptor 4 (CCR4) has been identified as a novel molecular target in antibody therapy for patients with adult T‐cell leukemia–lymphoma (ATL) and peripheral T‐cell lymphoma, and the humanized anti‐CCR4 monoclonal antibody mogamulizumab has been developed. We reported HBV reactivation of an ATL patient with previously resolved HBV infection after mogamulizumab treatment in a dose‐finding study for this antibody. Our retrospective analysis using preserved samples also revealed the detailed kinetics of HBV DNA levels before and just after HBV reactivation.     

Rare clinically significant hepatic events and hepatitis B reactivation occur more frequently following rather than during direct‐acting antiviral therapy for chronic hepatitis C: Data from a national US cohort

Recently, cases of hepatitis B virus reactivation (HBVr) with direct‐acting antiviral therapy (DAAs) for HCV have been reported. However, few data exist from large, Western cohorts. The study objectives were to evaluate the incidence of alanine aminotransferase (ALT) flares, clinically significant hepatic events, and HBVr among a national cohort of US veterans with prior exposure to HBV (anti‐HBc+) treated with DAAs. We used a national administrative database to identify patients treated with DAAs from January 2014 through November 2016 and obtained clinical and demographic as well as HBV and HCV treatment data. HBVr was defined as an at least 1‐log increase in HBV DNA titre. Among 17 779 anti‐HBc+ patients, 17 400 were HIV? and 379 were HIV+. Among the HIV? patients, 17 266 (99%) were HBsAg? prior to DAA therapy and 134 were HBsAg+. Among HIV‐, HBsAg? patients, ALT elevations greater than 10 times the upper limit of normal (ULN; ≥300 IU/mL) were rare and occurred more frequently after treatment completion: 31 cases (<0.1%) during vs 85 (0.6%) following treatment. Clinically significant hepatic events defined as ALT increases >100 IU/L with total bilirubin >2.5 mg/dL occurred in 39 cases (0.3%), most often following DAA completion (n = 35 cases, 3/35 in setting of HCV relapse). Among 31 patients with post‐DAA hepatic events without HCV relapse, 10 (32%) were confirmed unrelated to HBVr by HBsAg and/or HBV DNA testing, 1 (3%) confirmed due to HBVr, and 20 (65%) did not have documented HBV‐related testing. One additional case of HBsAg? to + seroreversion was identified. Among HBsAg+ DAA recipients, 2/97 (2%), both with cirrhosis, experienced ALT elevations ≥300 IU/mL in the setting of HBVr. In conclusion, clinically significant hepatic events and HBVr were rare and much more likely among HBsAg‐positive individuals. Anti‐HBc + patients should be monitored for ALT flares and HBVr during and possibly for up to 6 months post‐DAA therapy.     

Managing hepatitis B virus carriers with systemic chemotherapy or biologic therapy in the outpatient clinic

Aim: The number of outpatients receiving systemic chemotherapy in Japan has recently increased. We retrospectively examined whether hepatitis B virus (HBV) carriers were safely treated and managed with systemic chemotherapy or biologic agents as outpatients at our oncology center. Methods: A total of 40 115 consecutive infusion chemotherapy or biologic therapies were administrated to 2754 outpatients in the Chemotherapy and Oncology Center at Osaka University Hospital from December 2003 to March 2011. We first studied the prevalence of outpatients with hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), and then retrospectively evaluated a database to determine the frequencies of testing for other HBV‐related markers and the incidence of developing hepatitis or HBV reactivation in patients positive for HBsAg. As a control for comparison, we also examined these same factors in patients with hepatitis C virus antibody (anti‐HCV). Results: The majority of physicians at our hospital screened for HBsAg (95%) and anti‐HCV (94%) prior to administrating chemotherapy. Of the 2754 outpatients, 46 (1.7%) were positive for HBsAg and 90 (3.3%) were positive for anti‐HCV. Fifteen patients that were HBsAg positive were treated with lamivudine or entecavir prior to chemotherapy. None of the patients with HBsAg taking a prophylactic antiviral developed hepatitis, and only one breast cancer patient without prophylactic antiviral treatment (1/31 [3.2%]) developed hepatitis due to HBV reactivation. Conclusion: HBV reactivation occurred in outpatients without prophylactic antiviral treatment, but the incidence was relatively low.     

Risk of hepatitis B virus reactivation in hepatitis B virus + hepatitis C virus‐co‐infected patients with compensated liver cirrhosis treated with ombitasvir,paritaprevir/r + dasabuvir + ribavirin

Hepatitis B virus may reactivate in patients with chronic hepatitis C treated with direct‐acting antivirals. The aim of this study was to investigate the risk of hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation in HBV + hepatitis C virus (HCV)‐co‐infected patients with compensated liver cirrhosis treated with paritaprevir/ombitasvir/ritonavir, dasabuvir with ribavirin. We reviewed prospectively gathered data from a national cohort of 2070 hepatitis C virus patients with compensated liver cirrhosis who received reimbursed paritaprevir/ombitasvir/r, dasabuvir with ribavirin for 12 weeks from the Romanian National Health Agency during 2015‐2016. Twenty‐five patients in this cohort were HBs antigen positive (1.2%); 15 untreated with nucleotide analogues agreed to enter the study. These patients were followed up: ALT monthly, serology for HBV and DNA viral load at baseline, EOT and SVR at 12 weeks. Hepatitis B virus (HBV)‐co‐infected patients were all genotype 1b and 52% females, with a median age of 60 years (51 ÷ 74); 76% were pretreated with peginterferon + ribavirin; 72% were with severe necroinflammatory activity on FibroMax assessment; 40% presented comorbidities; and all were HBe antigen negative. Hepatitis C virus (HCV) SVR response rate was 100%. Hepatitis B virus (HBV)‐DNA viral load was undetectable in 7/15 (47%) before therapy, and for the other 8 patients, it varied between below 20 and 867 IU/mL. Five patients (33%) presented virological reactivation (>2 log increase in HBV‐DNA levels) during therapy. One patient presented with hepatitis associated with HBV reactivation, and two started anti‐HBV therapy with entecavir. Hepatitis B virus (HBV) virological reactivation was present in 33% in our patients. Generally, HBV‐DNA elevations were mild (<20 000 IU/mL); however, we report one case of hepatitis associated with HBV reactivation.     

HBV reactivation in patients with HCV/HBV cirrhosis on treatment with direct‐acting antivirals

Anecdotal reports suggest that patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) hepatitis and overt or occult hepatitis B virus (HBV) coinfection may reactivate HBV when HCV is suppressed or cleared by direct‐acting antivirals (DAAs). We assessed the prevalence of overt or previous HBV coinfection and the risk of HBV reactivation in patients with HCV cirrhosis treated with DAAs. This was a retrospective cohort of 104 consecutive patients with HCV cirrhosis treated with DAAs. Serum HCV‐RNA and HBV‐DNA were tested at weeks 4, 8 and 12 of DAAs therapy and at week 12 of follow‐up. At the start of DAAs, eight patients (7.7%) were HBsAg positive/HBeAg negative with undetectable HBV‐DNA and low levels of quantitative HBsAg (four on nucleos(t)ide analogues [NUCs] and four inactive carriers), 37 patients (35.6%) had markers of previous HBV infection (25 anti‐HBc positive, 12 anti‐HBc/anti‐HBs positive) and 59 (56.7%) had no evidence of HBV infection. Sixty‐seven patients (64.4%) were HCV‐RNA negative at week 4 and 98 (94.2%) achieved sustained virological response. All four HBsAg‐positive patients treated with NUCs remained HBV‐DNA negative, but three of four untreated patients showed an increase in HBV‐DNA of 2‐3 log without a biochemical flare and achieved HBV‐DNA suppression when given NUCs. During or after DAAs, by conventional assay, HBV‐DNA remained not detectable in all 37 anti‐HBc‐positive patients but in three of them (8.1%) HBV‐DNA became detectable with a highly sensitive PCR. HBV reactivation is likely to occur in untreated HBV/HCV‐coinfected cirrhotic patients when they undergo HCV treatment with DAAs. Pre‐emptive therapy with NUCs should be considered in this setting. Anti‐HBc‐positive patients rarely reactivate HBV without clinical or virological outcomes.     

Hepatitis B reactivation after kidney transplantation in hepatitis B surface antigen‐negative,core antibody‐positive recipients

Nowadays, intensive immunosuppressive therapy including rituximab is commonly used prior to kidney transplantation (KT), raising concerns over hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation among hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)‐negative and anti‐hepatitis B core (HBc)‐positive KT recipients. Recent practice guidelines suggested watchful monitoring or antiviral prophylaxis for the first 6‐12 months, the period of maximal immunosuppression. However, the actual risk for HBV reactivation, and whether short‐term antiviral therapy in the early period is necessary, remains unclear. A total of 449 HBsAg‐negative and anti‐HBc‐positive KT recipients were analysed for HBV reactivation. During a median follow‐up of 6.7 (interquartile range: 4.2‐9.4) years, HBV reactivation was observed in 9 patients (2.0%). The median time of HBV reactivation from KT was 2.8 years (range: 1.4‐11.5 years), with cumulative incidence rates of 0%, 1% and 2% for 1, 3 and 5 years, respectively. There were no severe adverse outcomes, including liver transplantation or mortality related to HBV reactivation. The risk of HBV reactivation was not high, even in anti‐HBs‐negative patients (n = 60, 4% at 5 years), ABO mismatch (n = 92, 4% at 5 years), use of rituximab (n = 66, 3% at 5 years) or plasmapheresis (n = 17, 7% at 5 years), and acute rejection (n = 169, 3% at 5 years). In conclusion, the HBV reactivation risk was not high and the time of detection was not clustered in the early post‐KT period. Our findings favour continued watchful monitoring over antiviral prophylaxis in the early period.     

Fatal reactivation of hepatitis B virus infection in a patient with adult T‐cell leukemia–lymphoma receiving the anti‐CC chemokine receptor 4 antibody mogamulizumab

We report an adult T‐cell leukemia–lymphoma (ATL) patient suffering from fatal reactivation of hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection after treatment with the anti‐CC chemokine receptor 4 (CCR4) monoclonal antibody, mogamulizumab. HBV reactivation occurred without liver damage in this hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) negative patient, who was seropositive for antibodies against the viral core and surface antigens at baseline, after two cycles of CHOP regimen (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine and prednisolone) followed by six cycles of THP‐COP regimen (cyclophosphamide, pirarubicin, vincristine and prednisolone). Unexpectedly, mogamulizumab monotherapy for relapsed CCR4 positive ATL induced sudden and fatal liver failure due to HBV reactivation, despite antiviral prophylaxis with entecavir. This clinical course may not only offer important suggestions to prevent critical HBV reactivation in HBsAg positive cancer patients who receive immune‐enhancing drugs such as anti‐CCR4 antibody, but also provide a clue to understanding the pathogenesis of HBV reactivation following systemic chemotherapy.     

Effect of immunosuppressive therapy on patients with inflammatory bowel diseases and hepatitis B or C virus infection

Viral hepatitis reactivation has been widely reported in patients undergoing immunosuppressive therapy; however, few data are available about the risk of HBV and HCV reactivation in patients with inflammatory bowel disease, receiving immunosuppressive drugs. The aim of our study was to assess the prevalence of HBV and HCV infection in a consecutive series of patients with inflammatory bowel disease and to value the effects of immunosuppressive therapy during the course of the infection. Retrospective observational multicenter study included all consecutive patients with inflammatory bowel disease who have attended seven Italian tertiary referral hospitals in the last decade. A total of 5096 patients were consecutively included: 2485 Crohn's disease and 2611 Ulcerative Colitis. 30.5% and 29.7% of the patients were investigated for HBV and HCV infection. A total of 30 HBsAg positive, 17 isolated anti‐HBc and 60 anti‐HCV‐positive patients were identified. In all, 20 patients with HBV or HCV infection received immunosuppressive therapy (six HBsAg+; four isolated anti‐HBc+ and 10 anti‐HCV+). One of six patients showed HBsAg+ and one of four isolated anti‐HBc+ experienced reactivation of hepatitis. Two of six HBsAg patients received prophylactic therapy with lamivudine. Only one of 10 anti‐HCV+ patients showed mild increase in viral load and ALT elevation. Screening procedures for HBV and HCV infection at diagnosis have been underused in patients with inflammatory bowel disease. We confirm the role of immunosuppressive therapy in HBV reactivation, but the impact on clinical course seems to be less relevant than previous reported.     

A case of acute hepatitis B in a chronic hepatitis C patient after daclatasvir and asunaprevir combination therapy: hepatitis B virus reactivation or acute self-limited hepatitis?

Reactivation of hepatitis B virus (HBV) in HBV surface antigen (HBsAg)-positive patients treated with cytotoxic chemotherapy is well known. HBV reactivation in patients with HBV and hepatitis C virus (HCV) coinfection caused by direct-acting antiviral (DAA) therapy has also recently been reported. We report a case of acute hepatitis B in a patient with HCV infection after DAA therapy. An 83-year-old woman was referred for chronic hepatitis C. She was infected with HCV genotype 1b and negative for HBsAg at baseline. She received daclatasvir and asunaprevir therapy, and HCV became negative at 4 weeks and remained negative until 6 months after the end of DAA therapy. Acute hepatitis B developed 5 months after ending DAA therapy. Genome sequencing revealed the subgenotype as B1, and the serological subtype as adr. T118 K mutation at the S region as an immune escape mutant was identified. These virologic features led to HBV reactivation. The presence of hepatitis B core antibody or HBs antibody was not determined before DAA therapy, so prior HBV infection status was unclear. This case is speculated to represent HBV reactivation in a patient with previously resolved HBV induced by DAA therapy, based on virologic analysis and clinical status. The risk might be very low, but DAA therapy can cause HBV reactivation in chronic hepatitis C patients with prior HBV infection. When acute hepatitis emerges in patients who have received DAA therapy for HCV, HBV reactivation should be considered to allow early initiation of anti-HBV therapy.